On 05/04/2009, at 3:18 AM, Emmanuel Onzon wrote: > > Well computers can't "guess" .. so we need some rules and > ways to break out. > > You can do inference with the available information. The same > information that makes you able to know which Obj_* > constructor to use when writing a user action for a new rule. > So if you can generate the associated action to your new > rule, then you know the implicit non terminal of each priority. >
Yes, the question is how.. now the *general* answer to that is .. make the Felix meta-syntax extensible, that is, allow users to write their own statements for adding new rules. I.e. second order extensibility. > With Christophe Raffalli, we discussed about implicit > disambiguating rules some times ago and concluded they > make the parser difficult to understand. Maybe the sensible > solution is just to forbid ambiguous programs and force the > user to write unambiguous code using parenthesis when needed. In that case why bother with GLR? :) > And allow users to make explicit disambiguating rules. > > Aging is problematic because when you import syntaxA > and then syntaxB, you don't have the same behaviour of the > parser than when importing syntaxB and then syntaxA. -- john skaller skal...@users.sourceforge.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Felix-language mailing list Felix-language@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/felix-language
